Hi Bruce, Thank your for your reply. On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 4:05 PM, J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Why is that? It's indeed not really based on actual proof but based on the experience we had. Faced several bugs, and it appears we had less issues by backporting a few commits; e.g related to races, leaks, performances regressions. We did not spent enough time on it to actually show this commit was actually fixing an issue hit. > Do you have a list? I am currently trying to switch from v3.14 to v4.1 (nfs client). So even know it is off topic, those I have in mind: 0d2a970 SUNRPC: Fix a backchannel race 6851447 SUNRPC: Fix a backchannel deadlock 0993920 SUNRPC: Prevent SYN+SYNACK+RST storms 03c78827 SUNRPC: Fix races between socket connection and destroy code a41cbe8 Failing to send a CLOSE if file is opened WRONLY and server reboots on a 4.x mount 39d0d3b NFS: Fix a tracepoint NULL-pointer dereference 5e99b53 nfs4: reset states to use open_stateid when returning delegation voluntarily e92c1e0 NFSv4: Fix a nograce recovery hang 6b55970 nfs: Fix a memory leak when meeting an unsupported state protect I am probably wrong on most of them but we had better stability after applying them and I probably forgot some. > I don't expect *proof*, necessarily, but some sort of argument would be > helpful. In my environment, if I hit this race, it is not acceptable to not being able to unmount the filesystem. Thanks, -- William -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
